How does a person define the Quaker faith? Quakers are not often reliant on creeds, therefore at times it becomes difficult to know what Friends really believe.
How does a person define the Quaker faith? Quakers are not often reliant on creeds, therefore at times it becomes difficult to know what Friends really believe.
But there are a few things that have defined Quakers over the years, and the Quaker belief in non-violence is one of those. This website in no way speaks on behalf of the conservative Quakers. To find out the official Ohio Yearly Meeting statements on the subject of peace, please visit the OYM website. This link will take you straight to the page which discusses Quakers and peace, and will give you much information on individual Quakers and their decisions on military service.
If there is any word associated with the Quaker faith, it is peace. Conservative Quakers embrace the Christian faith, and take Jesus at his word. For conservative friends, the practice of non-violience is not a politcal movement, it is an attempt to obey the words of Jesus, and an acknowledgement that Jesus was quite explicit on this subject. Of course, every Quaker makes his or her own decision about vexing issues, but you will find that if there is anything Conservative Quakers almost unanimously agree on, it is the necessity of practicing non-violence. This applies to the practice of war, as well as the subject of capital punishment. Again, please understand that the official OYM Website makes the official conservative Quaker statements on capital punishment and other issues. On the site you are on presently, we offer information that can help you understand who we are, and how you can get to know North Main Friends. Perhaps you feel capital punishment is necessary in certain cases, or there are times that violence is necessary. We at North Main Friends welcome you whatever your feelings on this subject, and we would like to hear what you have to say (after the meeting of course).
Conservative Friends in general feel that wars do not come only as a result of military enterprise. All of us, in our daily communications with others, can help to make a peaceful world. Being rude and hostile with other members of our community can create rippling effects that can lead to more extreme forms of violence. Two good examples of this include our behavior while operating automobiles, as well as our behavior when we contribute to blogs. What is the point of saying we believe in peace when we react violently to people sharing the road with us? This does not only mean the extreme cases of those drawing guns on people who pull in front of them; it also means our cursing and gesturing at unknown people in other cars. Peace starts at home, and our conduct with those we don't know is important at any stage. And what about the news blogs? It is often necessary to state one's opinions; it is often necessary to disagree adamantly— but is it necessary to do so in a rude and vicious manner? Words can be violent as well as physical blows, and these words can create dynamics that incite more harmful forms of violence later. There is one thing common to both of these problems—the recipients of our anger are usually anonymous, and more importantly, we're able to express our anger in an anonymous manner. When answering blogs or when driving, we would all be more civil if everyone knew our identity. And we would all be more civil if we knew the people we were responding to. If we truly want world peace, and if we truly believe that Jesus spoke out against the use of violence to solve problems, then it is truly inconsistent to indulge in road rage or "blog rage".